CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

Robotics in sports presents complex challenges at the intersection of artificial intelligence and
engineering. RoboCup Soccer, particularly the Small Size League (SSL), serves as a valuable
platform for advancing the field of robotics. This competition involves teams of autonomous
robots playing soccer, requiring sophisticated strategies and real-time decision-making
capabilities.

Path planning is a critical component in the success of robot soccer teams, as it directly
affects the robots' ability to navigate the field, avoid obstacles, and achieve strategic
objectives. Efficient path planning algorithms are essential for enhancing the performance of
robots in dynamic and unpredictable environments, such as a soccer field during a match.

This project focuses on developing a fast path planning algorithm tailored for the RoboCup
SSL. The goal is to create an algorithm that not only performs well in static environments but
also adapts quickly to dynamic changes, such as moving obstacles (opponents) and shifting
objectives (ball position). By leveraging simulation tools like grSim, this study aims to
evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm and compare it with existing solutions
like the Rapidly-exploring Random Tree (RRT) and the Fast Path Planner (STOx' Planner).

RoboCup SSL, established in 1997, is an international robotics competition with the long-
term goal of developing autonomous robots that can outperform human soccer teams by the
mid-21st century. The competition challenges teams to create robots capable of playing
soccer with minimal human intervention, promoting advancements in artificial intelligence,
robotics, and related technologies. The dynamic nature of soccer, with constantly changing
positions and strategies, makes it an ideal testbed for evaluating the capabilities of
autonomous robots.

Path planning is a key aspect of autonomous robotics, especially in dynamic settings like
RoboCup Soccer. Effective algorithms help robots move across the field, avoid obstacles, and
reach their goals efficiently. Various algorithms have been developed for this purpose, each
with specific advantages and disadvantages.

Traditional path planning algorithms like Dijkstra’s and A* are known for reliably finding the
shortest path in grid-based environments. However, these algorithms can be computationally
heavy and struggle in dynamic environments with many obstacles [1]. Heuristic algorithms,
such as Genetic Algorithms (GA) and Ant Colony Optimization (ACO), use nature-inspired
methods to solve path planning problems. These are good for complex and dynamic
environments but can be computationally intensive [2]. Modern algorithms like Rapidly-
exploring Random Tree (RRT) and its enhanced version, RRT*, strike a balance between
computational efficiency and path optimality. They work well in high-dimensional spaces
and complex settings, making them popular recently [3].
The STOx Path Planner creates straight-line paths between two points while avoiding
obstacles. It is known for its speed and efficiency in dynamic environments. This planner
creates sub-goals when it encounters obstacles, generating a series of straight-line segments
that navigate around them. The STOx Path Planner is fast and simple, reducing
computational load. However, it is less flexible in complex environments with many
obstacles and may need frequent recalculations [1].

On the other hand, the RRT algorithm builds a tree of random branches from the start to the
goal, making it effective at avoiding obstacles by expanding outwards towards the goal. RRT
is flexible in navigating around complex obstacles and works well in high-dimensional
spaces. However, it is slower than STOx, which can be a drawback in real-time applications,
and it is more computationally demanding, especially in environments with many obstacles.
RRT* improves RRT by ensuring the shortest path is found, but this increases computational
demands [4].

In practical applications like RoboCup Soccer, the choice of a path planning algorithm can
greatly affect robot performance. The STOx Path Planner's quick execution makes it suitable
for scenarios needing fast responses and straightforward navigation. In contrast, RRT's
flexibility is better for environments with many obstacles and complex paths [5].
Understanding these algorithms' strengths and weaknesses helps select the right one for
specific applications, enhancing autonomous robots' performance in dynamic environments.
Future work could include integrating more advanced strategies and real-time adjustments to
improve robot navigation and performance.

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY

Environment Setup

The grSim simulator is used to create a virtual environment for testing the path planning
algorithm. This simulator provides a realistic representation of the RoboCup SSL field,
including dynamic obstacles and moving opponents. The environment setup involves
configuring the field dimensions, placing static and dynamic obstacles, and initializing the
robot's position and target.

The simulation environment allows for comprehensive testing of the algorithm under various
scenarios, ensuring robustness and reliability. Key parameters such as obstacle density, robot
speed, and reaction time are varied to assess the algorithm's performance under different
conditions.

Data Collection

Data is collected during simulation experiments, including robot path lengths, execution
times, and task success rates. The data is processed using Python libraries for analysis and
visualization. Key metrics used for evaluation include:

 Path Length: The total distance traveled by the robot.

 Execution Time: The time taken to compute the path.
 Collision Rate: The frequency of collisions with obstacles.
 Success Rate: The percentage of successful task completions.

This data is crucial for comparing the performance of the custom fast path planner with
existing algorithms like RRT and STOx' Planner. By analyzing these metrics, the study aims
to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each algorithm, providing insights into their
suitability for different scenarios.

The data collection process involves running multiple simulation trials with varying
parameters to ensure a comprehensive evaluation. Each trial is repeated multiple times to
account for variability in the simulation environment and ensure statistically significant
results. The collected data is then analyzed to identify trends and patterns, providing a
detailed understanding of the algorithm's performance.

CHAPTER IV: IMPLEMENTATION

The implementation involves setting up the grSim simulator and integrating the custom fast
path planner. Key components of the code include:

1. Environment Setup: Initialize the simulator and configure the game settings.
2. Path Planning Algorithm: Implement the custom fast path planner using Python.
3. Data Processing: Collect and process simulation data using Python libraries.
4. Visualization: Visualize the results using matplotlib and other visualization tools.

The implementation process is iterative, involving multiple rounds of testing and

optimization to refine the algorithm and improve its performance. The Python code is
structured to be modular, allowing for easy adjustments and enhancements.

The environment setup involves defining the dimensions of the soccer field, placing obstacles
at predetermined locations, and initializing the robot's starting position and target. The grSim
simulator provides a user-friendly interface for configuring these settings, allowing for quick
adjustments and experimentation.

The path planning algorithm is implemented as a Python class, with methods for generating
paths, detecting obstacles, and adjusting the path in real-time. The algorithm uses a
combination of geometric calculations and heuristics to efficiently navigate the environment
and avoid obstacles.
Data processing involves collecting data from the simulation trials, storing it in a structured
format, and performing statistical analysis to evaluate the algorithm's performance. Python
libraries such as pandas and numpy are used for data manipulation and analysis, while
matplotlib is used for creating visualizations.

The visualization component involves creating graphs and charts to illustrate the algorithm's
performance metrics, such as path length, execution time, collision rate, and success rate.
These visualizations provide a clear and concise representation of the algorithm's strengths
and weaknesses, facilitating comparison with existing algorithms.

CHAPTER V: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Performance Metrics

The performance of the custom fast path planner is evaluated based on the following metrics:

1. Path Length: The total distance traveled by the robot. Shorter path lengths indicate
more efficient navigation.
2. Execution Time: The time taken to compute the path. Lower execution times indicate
faster, real-time planning capabilities.
3. Collision Rate: The frequency of collisions with obstacles. Lower collision rates
indicate better obstacle avoidance.
4. Success Rate: The percentage of successful task completions. Higher success rates
indicate more reliable performance.

Analysis

The custom fast path planner demonstrated significant improvements in execution time and
path consistency compared to RRT. The algorithm's ability to quickly adjust to dynamic
obstacles resulted in a lower collision rate and higher success rate in task completion.

The STOx' Planner, while also efficient, showed slightly higher execution times compared to
the custom fast path planner. However, both algorithms outperformed RRT in terms of path
quality and adaptability to dynamic changes.

The data collected from the simulation trials was analyzed to evaluate the algorithm's
performance under different conditions. The results indicate that the custom fast path planner
consistently produced shorter paths and lower execution times compared to RRT and STOx'
Planner. Additionally, the custom algorithm showed a significantly lower collision rate,
indicating better obstacle avoidance capabilities.

The success rate of the custom fast path planner was also higher, with the algorithm
successfully completing the majority of tasks in the simulation trials. This indicates that the
custom algorithm is more reliable and effective in dynamic environments, making it a
suitable choice for RoboCup SSL.

Visualizations
Below is a visualization of the environment with obstacles and the generated path using the
custom fast path planner algorithm.

This visualization shows the robot's starting position, target, and the path generated by the
custom fast path planner. The obstacles are represented as red squares, while the path is
represented as an orange dashed line. The visualization provides a clear representation of the
algorithm's ability to navigate the environment and avoid obstacles.

Additional visualizations, such as graphs and charts, are used to illustrate the performance
metrics of the custom fast path planner compared to RRT and STOx' Planner. These
visualizations provide a detailed understanding of the algorithm's strengths and weaknesses,
facilitating comparison and analysis.

CHAPTER VI: CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

Technical Challenges

Several technical challenges were encountered during the development and implementation
of the custom fast path planner. These challenges included:

1. Real-time Path Planning: Ensuring that the algorithm could generate paths in real-
time was a significant challenge. Real-time path planning requires efficient algorithms
that can quickly compute paths and adjust to dynamic changes in the environment.
2. Obstacle Detection: Accurately detecting and avoiding obstacles in a dynamic
environment is a complex task. The algorithm needed to be able to quickly identify
obstacles and generate sub-goals to navigate around them.
3. Algorithm Optimization: Optimizing the algorithm to minimize execution time and
path length while maintaining accuracy and reliability required extensive testing and
fine-tuning.

Solutions and Optimizations

To address these challenges, several solutions and optimizations were implemented:

1. Efficient Algorithms: The custom fast path planner was designed to be

computationally efficient, using geometric calculations and heuristics to quickly
generate paths and avoid obstacles. This ensured that the algorithm could perform
real-time path planning without significant delays.
2. Robust Obstacle Detection: Advanced obstacle detection techniques were
implemented to accurately identify obstacles and generate sub-goals for navigation.
This involved using sensor data and geometric calculations to detect obstacles and
adjust the path accordingly.
3. Iterative Testing and Optimization: The algorithm was iteratively tested and
optimized to improve its performance. This involved running multiple simulation
trials with varying parameters, analyzing the results, and making adjustments to the
algorithm to enhance its efficiency and reliability.
By addressing these challenges and implementing the solutions and optimizations, the custom
fast path planner was able to achieve significant improvements in performance and reliability.

CHAPTER VII: CONCLUSION

This project successfully developed and implemented a fast path planning algorithm for
RoboCup SSL. The custom algorithm outperformed traditional methods like RRT in terms of
speed and consistency, demonstrating its suitability for real-time applications in dynamic
environments. The algorithm's ability to quickly adjust to changing conditions and avoid
obstacles makes it a valuable tool for robotic soccer and other applications requiring efficient
path planning.

Future work can focus on further enhancing the algorithm and integrating it with other
components of robot soccer strategies. This may include incorporating advanced machine
learning techniques for improved decision-making, developing more sophisticated obstacle
detection methods, and exploring new path planning strategies to further optimize
performance.

The insights gained from this study contribute to the broader field of autonomous robotics,
providing valuable knowledge and techniques for developing efficient and reliable path
planning algorithms. The findings have potential applications beyond robotic soccer,
including autonomous vehicles, robotic navigation in hazardous environments, and other
areas requiring dynamic path planning.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmed Alharbi, Hamza Alsharif, Abdulrahman Javaid. "Simulating Path-Planning

Algorithms used in RoboCup SSL Competitions". King Fahd University of Petroleum
and Minerals, December 2020.
2. Sertac Karaman, Emilio Frazzoli. "Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion
planning". The International Journal of Robotics Research, 2011.
3. P. E. Hart, N. J. Nilsson, B. Raphael. "A formal basis for the heuristic determination
of minimum cost paths". IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics,
1968.
4. Reinaldo A. C. Bianchi, H. Levent Akin, Subramanian Ramamoorthy, Komei
Sugiura. "RoboCup 2014: Robot World Cup XVIII". Springer International
Publishing, 2015.
5. M. Parth, S. Hetasha, S. Soumya, V. Saurav. "A review on algorithms for pathfinding
in computer games". ResearchGate, 2015.
6. B Browning, J Bruce, M Bowling, M Veloso. "STP: Skills, tactics, and plays for
multi-robot control in adversarial environments". Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, 2005.
7. 1. Karur, K., Sharma, N., Dharmatti, C. and Siegel, J.E., 2021. A Survey of Path
Planning Algorithms for Mobile Robots. *Vehicles*, 3(3), pp.448-468. Available at:
<https://www.mdpi.com/vehicles3030027> [Accessed 10 June 2024].
8.
9. 2. Moore, P. and Truong, D.X., 2019. Evolutionary Algorithm-Based Complete
Coverage Path Planning for Tetriamond Tiling Robots. *Robotics*, 8(2), p.44.
Available at: <https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/22/8983> [Accessed 10 June
2024].
10. 3. Luo, Q., 2022. An Optimized Probabilistic Roadmap Algorithm for Path Planning
of Mobile Robots in Complex Environments with Narrow Channels. *Sensors*,
22(22), p.8983. Available at: <https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/22/8983>
[Accessed 10 June 2024].
11.
12. 4. Muñoz, P., R-Moreno, M.D. and Castaño, B., 2017. Path Planning for Autonomous
Mobile Robots: A Review. *Sensors*, 22(22), p.8983. Available at:
<https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/22/22/8983> [Accessed 10 June 2024].
13.
14. 5. Wasik, A., Pereira, J.N., Ventura, R., Lima, P.U. and Martinoli, A., 2021. Multi-
Agent Collaborative Path Planning Based on Staying Alive Policy. *Robotics*, 10(1),
p.20. Available at: <https://www.mdpi.com/2504-446X/5/1/20> [Accessed 10 June
2024].